MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012477797 · doi:10.1016/j.rse.2020.111750

Characterizing marsh wetlands in the Great Lakes Basin with C-band InSAR observations

2020· article· en· W3012477797 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Zhaohua Chen, Lori White, Sarah Banks, Amir Behnamian, Benoît Montpetit, Jon Pasher, Jason Duffe, Danny Bernard

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing of Environment · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsInterferometric synthetic aperture radarWetlandMarshWater levelEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarHydrology (agriculture)GeologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is limited research focusing on Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) applications in the Great Lakes coastal wetlands with large water level fluctuations. In this study, we investigated the potential of using C-band SAR data to characterize marsh wetland and monitor water level changes along the coast of the Great Lakes. InSAR analysis was conducted using Radarsat-2 and Sentinel-1 data collected at Long Point, Ontario, Canada over the period of 2016–2018. Observations indicated that both backscattering coefficients and coherence from tall plants (e.g. cattail/Phragmites), short plants (e.g. grass), and water varied with different sensor modes (incidence angles and polarizations) in response to changes in phenology, disturbance, and water level. InSAR phase changes were closely related to fluctuations in water level and flow direction. We evaluated InSAR time series observations using measurements from water level loggers based on correlation and root mean square error (RMSE). It was found that correlation between InSAR measurements and water level changes in the field varied depending on the site, type of wetland vegetation, incidence angle and polarization. Although results from some sensor modes provided good correlation at a few locations, the low fringe rate and RMSE between 9 and 28 cm indicated that InSAR observations of water level changes were generally underestimated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.172 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote Sensing of EnvironmentSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207